Re: [PATCH v4 06/11] vfio: Sanity check maximum number of DMA mappings with RamDiscardMgr

[David Hildenbrand]

On 14.01.21 00:34, Alex Williamson wrote:
> On Thu,  7 Jan 2021 14:34:18 +0100
> David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com> wrote:
> 
>> Although RamDiscardMgr can handle running into the maximum number of
>> DMA mappings by propagating errors when creating a DMA mapping, we want
>> to sanity check and warn the user early that there is a theoretical setup
>> issue and that virtio-mem might not be able to provide as much memory
>> towards a VM as desired.
>>
>> As suggested by Alex, let's use the number of KVM memory slots to guess
>> how many other mappings we might see over time.
>>
>> Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
>> Cc: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
>> Cc: Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com>
>> Cc: Dr. David Alan Gilbert <dgilbert@redhat.com>
>> Cc: Igor Mammedov <imammedo@redhat.com>
>> Cc: Pankaj Gupta <pankaj.gupta.linux@gmail.com>
>> Cc: Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>
>> Cc: Auger Eric <eric.auger@redhat.com>
>> Cc: Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@linux.alibaba.com>
>> Cc: teawater <teawaterz@linux.alibaba.com>
>> Cc: Marek Kedzierski <mkedzier@redhat.com>
>> Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
>> ---
>>  hw/vfio/common.c | 43 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>  1 file changed, 43 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/hw/vfio/common.c b/hw/vfio/common.c
>> index 1babb6bb99..bc20f738ce 100644
>> --- a/hw/vfio/common.c
>> +++ b/hw/vfio/common.c
>> @@ -758,6 +758,49 @@ static void 
>> vfio_register_ram_discard_notifier(VFIOContainer *container,
>>                                vfio_ram_discard_notify_discard_all);
>>      rdmc->register_listener(rdm, section->mr, &vrdl->listener);
>>      QLIST_INSERT_HEAD(&container->vrdl_list, vrdl, next);
>> +
>> +    /*
>> +     * Sanity-check if we have a theoretically problematic setup where we 
>> could
>> +     * exceed the maximum number of possible DMA mappings over time. We 
>> assume
>> +     * that each mapped section in the same address space as a RamDiscardMgr
>> +     * section consumes exactly one DMA mapping, with the exception of
>> +     * RamDiscardMgr sections; i.e., we don't expect to have gIOMMU 
>> sections in
>> +     * the same address space as RamDiscardMgr sections.
>> +     *
>> +     * We assume that each section in the address space consumes one 
>> memslot.
>> +     * We take the number of KVM memory slots as a best guess for the 
>> maximum
>> +     * number of sections in the address space we could have over time,
>> +     * also consuming DMA mappings.
>> +     */
>> +    if (container->dma_max_mappings) {
>> +        unsigned int vrdl_count = 0, vrdl_mappings = 0, max_memslots = 512;
>> +
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_KVM
>> +        if (kvm_enabled()) {
>> +            max_memslots = kvm_get_max_memslots();
>> +        }
>> +#endif
>> +
>> +        QLIST_FOREACH(vrdl, &container->vrdl_list, next) {
>> +            hwaddr start, end;
>> +
>> +            start = QEMU_ALIGN_DOWN(vrdl->offset_within_address_space,
>> +                                    vrdl->granularity);
>> +            end = ROUND_UP(vrdl->offset_within_address_space + vrdl->size,
>> +                           vrdl->granularity);
>> +            vrdl_mappings = (end - start) / vrdl->granularity;
> 
> --->                         += ?

Ah, yes, thanks. That's the result of testing only with a single
virtio-mem device :)


-- 
Thanks,

David / dhildenb